Okay. Without even reading the article, allow me to point out one glaring hypocrisy:

I imagine Israel is also 'deeply concerned' that her previous appeals for the disarming of terrorist militias intent on her destruction also went unheeded; her appeals fell on deaf ears... deaf U.N. ears. So why should Kofi expect anyone to care about his appeals, when he cares nothing for the suffering of Israelis?

Bodies covered, uncoveredbroken, whole, clean or soiled;casualties all and caring naughtfor the politics of warThe rhetoric of the living never reach their earsThe rhetoric of the livingdo not halt the slow corruption of deathor a single spade-full of eartheach adding cover to the shame of war; the casualties of war

It doesn't matter who fired firstblame is levied venomous and searingupon whomever suffers the misfortuneof being the strongerIt doesn't matter what duplicity has led events to these bloodied groundsand the sound of spades cutting through earthblame is assigned to him whose successstacks the casualties of war highest

The world hates Israel;despises her God favored status ~ spits at the mere mention of her nameThe world defends Hizbullah;princes of murder and subterfugeshedding their tears for each killer slainFor who else will silence God?Who else but Islam?Who else but Hell's disciples?Whose only love is death...Whose only lover is murder...whose only god is evil incarnate...Whose only fear is Light

"This is one time an Arab aggressor must be allowed to be beaten so badly that every civilized nation will stand in horror, wanting desperately to step in and stop the carnage... But knowing that the fight will only truly be over when one side gives up and finally admits defeat."

Bogner's reminisces on a personal experience that speaks to today's situation in Lebanon. It's a very good read; shocking in it's imagery, but then much of life presents shocking imagery. It's nothing you haven't seen or read already... But then, maybe it isn't.

...Condoleeza Rice played Brahms. Talk about disconnects! Half a million Lebanese are homeless? Let them eat cake! The only point in all this that seems to be right on target is America's refusal to condemn Israel for defending herself against a foe that desires only to kill her men, women, and children... to the last soul.

But looking back to my previous post... I'm with ER on this, I'd like to see what the headlines around the world spoke of in the run up to World Wars I & II. There's a lot of talk lately that what we are really seeing is the opening salvos of World War III, but I think this displays an inordinate amount of ignorance. Yet perhaps I give people too much credit; that they should have no difficulties recognizing that Change is the one inconstant-- unchangeable --force in our universe. Were it otherwise, entropy and stagnation would kill us all.

The fact is, all things are mutable EXCEPT change, and God. War, then, or rather the faces it wears, changes. And man, short-lived and contextually memoried, finds it difficult to see beyond his own experience. The face of war has changed so many times, but the fundamental, the base elements of war, never do...

"War is like water — its fundamental character remains unchanging precisely because the nature of the humans who fight it is constant over the centuries. True, the pump — the delivery system of flint, arrows, firearms, nuclear bombs, guided missiles and satellite weapons — radically changes the face of battle with each generation. But the essence of war nevertheless stays the same,..."

--Victor Davis Hanson

But though it's base never shifts, as Mr. Hanson points out, War is very adaptable, even if those who fight them are not-- It's the mindset of those who fight their wars I refer to here. The Cold War, was just as much a world war as the first 2... it had it's innocent victims, it casualties, its weapons, its posturing, and its rhetoric.

Could it be that we don't recognize the cold war as a world war because there aren't any standing memorials, no national holiday, or millions buried on foreign fields? Will we miss the significance of this new conflict and not give it the focus it deserves, all because we didn't recognize the opening salvos in 1979, and earlier? Is it not fair to say this is a struggle for ideology every bit as much as the cold war was? Communism vs Democracy? Facism against Liberty? Why is America and the rest of the world so reluctant to see the enemy for who he is? And why are we so unwilling to recognize the very real threat he poses to our innocents, our pocketbooks, our pleasures; in short, our way of life?

Just as not all Germans were nazis, just as not all German's would hand over a wounded American soldier caught behind enemy lines, so too are Muslims. Not all will seek our heads, eyes and limbs. But we didn't balk at doing what needed to be done in Germany because not all Germans were Nazis.

If only 10% of Muslims worldwide espouse the Wahabbist view of jihad, we're still left with a number that describes an enemy 100 million strong. 100,000,000 men and women who seek to see our way of life trodden under foot.

All this is mostly for me... You can make what you wish of these-- I certainly will. For now I need time to digest it all. I don't really like posting a bunch of headlines and links, without adding my own two cents, but as the blog description says, I'm merely "collecting all those scraps I find in my pocket at the end of the day..." And the day is still young.

Updates and personal impressions to follow, so for now, if you feel inclined, please add your own two cents.

"Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God. For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance."

--Psalm 83:1-4

A twelve-hundred year old psalm book was found in an Irish bog last week. It was opened to the above passage. Coincidence? What think you?

We know our own weaknesses and short-comings, so why do we insist on believing those we put above us are somehow incapable of the very same weaknesses with which we struggle each day; from putting their own self-interests above ours? Why do we insist government and media will never lie to us? For as sure as politicians wear ties and power suits, the only persons incapable of lying are those who either haven't yet been born, or are already dead and buried... Or cremated, as the case may be.

America is too busy seeking its own desires and pleasures to care about what's happening down the street, across town, in the next city, across the nation, or any where else in the world. America has become corpulent and criminally indifferent as to who or what entity rules her ultimate destiny, so long as her pleasures continue unabated. Americans great and small, for some unfathomable reason, happily swallow the lies they're spoon-fed; often by others with just as much food drying on their duplicitous chins.

And I can see no solution to this worsening cultural malaise. Ours is a nation that steadfastly refuses to accept any responsibility, personal or national, for the world we live in. And sadly, I can't imagine this nation, however abhorrent the taste of strained peas, setting aside its own self-indulgences to take back the reins of an America blithely racing toward societal oblivion.

We want peace, but we are unwilling to pay for it. We want riches, but we are unwilling to work for them. We want what we want, now, even if by means of an inevitable bankruptcy, we have to steal it. We fail to see in others what we know exists in ourselves. We can't call a man a terrorist, because we can't understand what he's had to suffer. We can't feed the world, because we're too busy shopping at Wal Mart and placing whatever spare change is in our pocket into the bright red kettle. We call out to God in need, and curse Him with the casual ease of a serial-killer. We could fix every problem in the world today except one, but we won't. To do that we would have to first fix what we are powerless to fix.

But we are good people. We deserve to be blessed. We have done so much already but in the end we can only do so much. We are the most caring and giving people on earth, but we will never heal the entire world. Give a man a fish and he'll eat one day, teach him to fish and he'll still go hungry when the rivers dry up. We're spreading hope to the hopeless, and the poor third-world peoples adore us for our generosity. We pardon murderers, and murder the innocent. We lie about who we are, and what we do, and we pat ourselves on the back for making the world believe. Subterfuge is become virtuous, and virtue a club in the hands of ignorant men.

And I'm beginning to ramble. I find it most telling that the Bible says, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." And yet the world allows others to study for them. The world can't be bothered to learn anything for itself. I find it telling that the Bible says, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." But we're happier with the 'Truth' the world gives us. Searching it out for ourselves... who has the time?

Sen Harry Reid had something to say on Monday. Something so bold only Democratic Jonestowner's could swallow. He castigated President Bush for failing in Iraq, and insisted Democrats only want to win the Global War on Terror by neutering Iran's nuclear ambitions, reining in North Korea, and bringing Osama to Justice, all the while insisting America help defend Israel who is only trying to defend herself from terrorists thugs. Hugh Hewitt has Reid's incredible statement, and it's quite a hoot. But it's also a dangerous hoot. It's beyond question that Mr. Reid believes his own rhetoric, though 'sophistry' better describes each lying breath and hot, disingenuous exhale.

"We need to do the hard work to put Iran back in the box, and bring stability back to the middle-east... "Together, we can bring some good out of this terrible situation, by finding ways to support the Lebanese government, disarm Hezbollah, and ultimately, contain Iranian power."

As if 'Stability' ever existed in the Middle East.

Dangerous Ignorance...

Isaac Herzog, currently Israel's Minister of Tourism and a member of the Knesset, has an opinion piece in today's online edition of the UK's The Guardian. In 'This is a fight for our survival', Mr. Herzog makes a great case for Israel's reasoning behind the war she is currently levying upon the terrorist organization Hezbollah. Printing out Herzog's statement and the comments that follow would cost you a lot of toner (it was 57 pages when I considered printing earlier this evening) but what I found most startling about the whole thing was not Herzog's reasoning, but rather the lack of reason from 90% of the commentors.

Here are two such comments I wanted to share with the Sane world, to demonstrate just how dangerous our political opposition is. And don't go thinking this is just England, though their venom surprised me quite a bit. This first comment comes from...

jsbachUSAJuly 25, 2006 07:05 AM

Mr. Herzog blindly does not see that Israel is already doomed no matter how many people it kills in the mean time. In a few short years the US will implode in decay because of immense internal problems it is ignoring [peak oil, debt, etc.]. Once that occurs, it will be impossible for Israel to sustain a multi-front war against the world for very long. Even the UK that created the problem in the ME by allowing Jewish people to move there will turn its back on Israel. What Israel should do [but is emotionally unable to do] is negotiate a fair peace, now. If Israel offered: [1] give up most of the land and water and moved all its citizens into a much smaller space [2] gave up all its WMD and most of its heavy military hardware [3] Apologize for the extremely bad behavior of their past including admitting the wanton slaughter of thousands of non-Jews [4] generously compensating every Arab that had ever been harmed by Israel [5] making Jerusalem into an international city ... then possibly Israel would continue to exist. As it is now, the path Israel has chosen guarantees that it will cease to exist within 25 years. I do not wish Israel ill, but the clear lesson of history is once it loses its patron, it will go the way of the wind. It is impossible to bludgeon your neighbors into peace. Eventually the power will shift and the neighbors that were mistreated will have their revenge, in spades. I am in the second half of my life and fully expect that Israel will be gone before I am. It will be a pity that so many people let outrageous pride kill them.

Wow, let's be thankful this guy isn't in a position to dictate foreign policy. He's a danger to Israel, the United States, and the world... and quite possibly himself.

Next up are the edited [because I don't want to inject too much venom here] remarks of one...

CrankJuly 25, 2006 07:29 AM

What a vulgar, lying little racist. Undoubtedly the most concentrated pack of lies imaginable. It is not Hezbollah that is a terrorist organization, but the Judeofascist state that has terrorised Lebanon since the fifties. Hezbollah grew up in resistance to the Israeli occupation from 1978, when Israel ruled Southern Lebanon is more or less the same manner as the Nazis ruled the conquered regions of the Soviet Union. That is with murder, terror, torture and disappearances... Israel is deliberately targetting civilians and their infrastructure (and, naturally lying through their teeth to deny it) already, so the ethnic cleansing stage is upon us. As for Herzog's guff about a fight for survival, if he thinks anyone but a cretin or a fellow hypocrite will buy the intelligence insulting lie that Israel with its 400 nuclear weapons, thousands of tanks and fighters and the unqualified support of the world's greatest, most murderous terrorist power the USA, is at risk of its survival, then he's a fool to boot. I respect his intelligence enough to conclude that he's simply lying.

This is what you'll find if you choose to peruse the comments, with rarely a statement in defense of Israel. It seems the entire world has chosen to condemn a sovereign nation who has chosen to defend itself against terrorists. But then the world holds themselves to a much different standard than the one they impose upon Israel. The world is filled with hypocrites, and so by extension, is the supremely anti-Jewish United Nations.

Lastly, I found this nugget at News Busters [linked in the sidebar]. Global Warming is the Disaster du Jour it seems. The Great Albert has even managed to whip the masses up into a frothing hysteria... the world, my friends, is doomed if something is not done within the next ten years. That's right, we only have Ten years to avert this global disaster.

Those of you who read this blog regularly will have seen a recent post wherein I refuse, against all reason and scientific data to the contrary, to believe there is such a danger as Global Warming... of the apocalyptic variety.

Well, lo and behold, a mere 32 years ago, Time Magazine tried to whip the masses up into a frothing hysteria over... get this! Global COOLING! That's right, a mere 30 years ago, the world was all but doomed to slip into another ice age. How 'convenient' the truth of this is lost to the Amnesiac Media Elite. Yes, people are dying in droves out in California. Triple-digit temperatures as high as 117-- as of today... 120 in Arizona. But guess what? It get's as hot as 130 and more in northern Africa. Read the original article at News Busters. It reads like this mornings news... in reverse.

Whelp, that's the end of the show, folks... Thanks for listening, and goodnight.

The first film I recall seeing Mako in was Conan the Barbarian. Since that time, 24 years ago, I've seen him in so many different things I can't begin to list them, and won't try. What I remember most was a Chuck Norris film he was in called Sidekicks playing the wise old karate master for a troubled youth, who as it turns out, was troubled in real life, committing suicide just 3 years ago... Jonathan Brandis.

One of Mako's last roles was in last years Memoirs of a Geisha. I've wanted to see this film but haven't found the time. The book was an excellent read. I'll have to rent it sometime soon.

NOBEL peace laureate Betty Williams displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday, lashing out at US President George W.Bush during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren.

Campaigning on the rights of young people at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane, Ms Williams spoke passionately about the deaths of innocent children during wartime, particularly in the Middle East, and lambasted Mr Bush.

"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.

"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.

"I don't know how I ever got a Nobel Peace Prize, because when I see children die the anger in me is just beyond belief. It's our duty as human beings, whatever age we are, to become the protectors of human life."

Who reading this has ever read Watership Down, by Richard Adams? What a wonderful book! If you haven't, go get a copy now; it is required reading in the school of life.

To the point. Vox Day in his latest article uses a term from Watership Down in the last line:

"...don't be surprised when the answer is the female equivalent of 'hrair.'"

For those of you who haven't yet read Watership Down I've decided to go ahead and explain the reference.

From Wikipedia [unreliable, I know, but wiki's right on, here]...

Hrair is a number too large to count. This term is from the fictional language Lapine used in Richard Adams's Watership Down. In this novel, a rabbit's hrair is greater than 4 whereas, for humans, hrair would be greater than 7 plus or minus 2.

From a psychological perspective, hrair is the point where the person is overwhelmed by concepts or change.

Get Watership Down from Amazon.com, and help Jeff Bezos build his space port.

Finally, if you've read this far without clicking on the Title Link let me just say, everything you've read thus far has absolutely no bearing on the subject of Vox Day's article, accept a point of reference for "Hrair" and a plug for a novel I can't imagine anyone NOT enjoying.

Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos is in the process of building a space port in Texas... the kind Ray Bradbury would be very proud of.

A spacecraft taking off from a private West Texas spaceport being bankrolled and developed by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos would take off vertically, but unlike NASA's space shuttle would also land vertically, according to an environmental study that offers a glimpse into the secretive plans.

...

As many as 10 flight tests lasting as long as a minute and reaching an altitude of about 2,000 feet could occur this year at the site, north of Van Horn on the 165,000-acre Corn Ranch purchased by Bezos. Over the following three years, as many as 25 launches would be made annually, growing in altitude to 325,000 feet and in duration to more than 10 minutes.

Commercial flights, a goal of the project, could begin in 2010, according to the timetable in the document, with as many as 52 a year.

I can see the ad-line now...

Weekly Flights to the Last Frontier!

Don't Get Left Behind!

Reserve Your Seat Today!

This is the future of space exploration... Private industry. Only the Private Sector has the interest and the power to make space travel/exploration accessible to the average Joe. Assuming, of course, the average Joe doesn't kill himself in an endless stream of conflict, war and genecide.

"By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the LORD'S song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy. Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

--Psalm 137

I remembered this as a wonderful tune by Don McLean of American Pie fame, discovering the psalm only afterward. What I had never connected to this psalm is that is was prophetic. It is not listed as a psalm of David, but that hardly matters. That fact is, Judah was not carried away into Babylon until, approximately, five-hundred years later.

Israel has not forgotten Jerusalem, and she remembers all too well what her captivity among the nations of the world has brought her. This is why she fights... Because she remembers sorrow and loss.

This photo was lifted, cutely renamed, and posted without permission by me. What I found interesting, beyond the imagery, was the original headline... "U.S. Speeds Up Bomb Delivery for the Israelis" right above the picture. However, judging by the picture the weapons we're sending are not very effective if the only damage they do is ecological-- To litter the landscape with leaflets.

In my previous post-- the one about someone else's post commenting on a post by the New York Times, the above photo is part and parcel of the NYT's article currently under scrutiny; as all New York Times articles of late deserve.

As for my recaptioning, manna was God's way of providing for the health and well-being of His people while wandering forty years in the desert. These leaflets are Israel's way of providing for the health and well-being of the 'Innocents of Lebanon' caught in the crossfire. That's my take, at least.

And here's the difference between Hezbollah and the Nation of Israel: Hezbollah hasn't bothered to drop a single leaflet to ask Israelis to move away from the killing fields.

What follows is a :rough translation: of the Israeli Leaflet, h/t to Blogging Beirut...

"To The Lebanese Residents

"The Israeli army will increase its actions in Lebanon against the continuing terrorist actions of Hizbullah to defend the citizens of the state of Israel.

"For the sake of your own safety, and in our wish not to harm any civilians that are not implicated, you must keep away from the locations where Hizbullah is present and acting against the state of Israel.

"Including:

"Locations where missiles are fired in the direction of the state of Israel.

"Locations of Hizbullah's arsenals and military equipment.

"Hizbullah's centers south of Beirut and areas under its control in the south of Lebanon.

"Beirut's southern suburb, the center of terrorism.

"The Israeli defense army calls on the Lebanese residents and Lebanese army to refrain from aiding, either directly or indirectly, elements of Hizbullah. Anyone who does will be putting their life in danger.

"Know that the persistance of terrorism against the state of Israel is keeping you from a better future.

Although I am not certain the New York Times outed anything secret with this piece-- I remember seeing this story on the web a few days ago, but honestly can't remember where --their continued penchant for trumpeting the disposition of our and our allies assets is nontheless deplorable.

Still, even if the news wasn't classified, one would think that the New York Times could tell the difference between telling the news based on fact and telling the news liberally peppered with personal opinion. I'm not going to post any of the article here, for that you can follow the link above, but I do want to take this time to set down my own impressions of its source, namely, the New York Times' article that spawned it.

Dr. Politico at PartisanTimes, says, "...the Times does not concern itself with the consequences of reporting sensitive information," as has been demonstrated all too often in recent months. They operate under the auspices of the First Amendment, yet they cavalierly, and with reckless abandon, play with the lives of people-- innocent people more often than not --they claim to support, ie; our troops, innocent Iraqis, those poor muslims at Guantanamo, and now the brave Hezbollah freedom fighters. They obviously don't care about the innocent Lebanese who suffer because the U.N. can't enforce its resolutions. Hezbollah was to have been disarmed, but Lebanon, weakened by Syria, is not powerful enough to do the job. But this is of little concern to the New York Times. At the top of their 'Gotcha' list is George W. Bush, and they don't care who they have to hurt to get him.

Again, as to whether or not the Times has disclosed secret information is up for debate; the deal, after all, was made and approved last year. But the fact that the New York Times has informants within the government who will only talk unless given anonymity speaks to the information being, at the very least, sensitive. So sensitive, in my estimation, that these sources fear repercussion for disclosing the details...

"The new American arms shipment to Israel has not been announced publicly, and the officials who described the administration’s decision to rush the munitions to Israel would discuss it only after being promised anonymity. The officials included employees of two government agencies, and one described the shipment as just one example of a broad array of armaments that the United States has long provided Israel."

"Long provided..." So where's the beef in this story? "Long Provided" implies a lot longer than the 5 years Bush has been in office, so why is the article strangely silent about the misdeeds of previous administrations that fall within this vague measure inherent in the writers choice of wording? More importantly, how does their disclosure help Hezbollah?

"Although Israel had some precision guided bombs in its stockpile when the campaign in Lebanon began, the Israelis may not have taken delivery of all the weapons they were entitled to under the 2005 sale."

By offering hope to the terrorists; that if they can but hold out long enough, Israel may very well exhaust all conventional means of obliterating her terrorist-tormentors. The same measure of hope was given to the North Vietnamese in no small part by our own media...

"We were not strong enough to drive out a half-million American troops, but that wasn't our aim. Our intention was to break the will of the American government to continue the war."

--North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap, 1990

And that appears to be the goal of left-wing media... of the New York Times... to break the will of the American government, and American people, to continue in a war we cannot afford to lose. And in the case presently before us, the war Israel cannot afford to lose. The New York Times, for all they'd shout to the contrary, seem only to care about losing this war for the Country that provides them with the very same amendment they hide behind.

The freedom of the press is not without limit-- they seem to have forgotten this. Indeed, all of America seems to have forgotten that every nation has, in time, crumbled beneath the weight of its own hubris. To say nothing of moral decay and the treason it inevitably breeds.

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."

On a different note. I went to the movies yesterday afternoon. I'm an M. Night Shyamalan fan. In my humble opinion he's the next best thing to still having Alfred Hitchcock in the world. Anyway. This movie, though PG, was not filled with the kind of language I would've been embarrassed to have God there with me watching-- He was, by the way. The Lady in the Water, unlike Shyamalan's previous films, was exactly what it was billed as... a fairy tale. A very good fairy tale.

There's quite a bit of humor in this film, but the humor is situational for the most part, rather than by construct. And there's several moments of scary. Parents be warned... this movie is rife with potential to make the kiddies scared of the dark... Assuming your children have not already been jaded by the fare Hollywood, and TV offers these days. And, as with all of M. Night films, there's a big pay off at the end, one I won't spoil here.

What was different from previous films is M. Night's on camera role, which was quite extensive, and more generous glimpses of the creature stalking, Story, the lead character.

I would have felt M. Night was abusing his privilege as writer, director, and producer for casting himself in a major role, except for the fact that he did a remarkable job on camera, and as he tends to be quite enigmatic in the real world, this was an opportunity to see him walk, talk, breath, and interact, albeit through the artifices of a script.

Lastly, the main character, Story... Story is played by Bryce Dallas Howard the same actress who played the blind girl in The Village. M. Night seems to love doing this... Reusing actors. Joaquin Phoenix in Signs and The Village was still Joaquin Phoenix. Bruce Willis is still Bruce Willis, with hair or without-- contrasting The Sixth Sense with Unbreakable. But were it not for my telling you Bryce Dallas Howard had the major role in The Village, you wouldn't have known it to see her on screen in The Lady in the Water. The difference is that remarkable.

Overall, this was a beautiful film... Slow to build as all of M. Night Shyamalan's films are, but in the end it didn't matter one bit to me. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I can't wait for this one to arrive on DVD. If you're the type who can afford it, and the kind who enjoys seeing movies more than once, I'd recommend it on this one. There's a lot to hear, and a lot to perceive visually, and contextually.

The ending was so completely satisfying, unlike many films these days. Despite the sadness revealed for some of the characters in this movie, there was a great sense of Hope at the end. And in the end, that's really all anyone wants, right?

Israel's war against Hezbolla and Hamas-- and by extension Syria and Iran, has me distracted. I don't know why anyone reads my blog, but for those of you who do there must be something here that strikes a pleasant or otherwise (insert appropriate adjective) reason that keeps you coming back.

For those of you who don't know... and that includes just about everyone on the planet, even people I work with... I've been chasing God in one way or another for the last 30 years. Or has He been chasing me? I've never felt called to preach or teach, even during my more faithful years. But I have been called to be a witness. And to learn. Even though I've never felt those specific calls, I have often felt called to enter a seminary... to learn. These days that feeling is very strong.

God has given me a lot of gifts. Gifts I've squandered... buried in the dirt. It's true. I'm loaded with creativity... I just have no idea what to do with it. I draw and paint, though not recently. I play musical instruments, but don't apply myself enough to even consider doing anything professional. The only gift I do put time and effort into is writing, and even in that I feel I squander too much. Some of you may beg to differ that my writing may be construed a gift-- So be it. I won't argue with you. But my point is this. Even a man, sated and water-fat, can taste moisture in the air... can sense when a large body of water is near. And I've been sensing this for a few years now.

Which brings me back to Israel. For me, Israel is like an empty glass with a bucket of ice sitting nice and pretty, inches away, beneath a blisteringly white hot desert sun. Now, a man dying of thirst might wonder why ice and an empty glass are sitting nice and pretty right in front of him. Such a man might even think it reasonable to search for a spigot nearby. But common sense, and all the signs around us, tells me to fill the glass with ice and wait... God will provide the water in due course. Israel, you see, represents 'Possibility'. The possibility of something truly refreshing. Without Israel we are left to chew ice... and squander the possibility of something far better.

Some will think that silly, but that's not my problem. I have a thirst only time and a glass of ice can fulfill. Has God been chasing me for thirty-plus years? I believe so. I believe in fact He's been chasing me since the foundation of the world. Some of what I write here doesn't always reflect that (though I fear it should), but this blog has never been about preaching or teaching (though I fear it should). That's not what I'm called to do... As far as I've been able to tell.

What I DO know is I've been called, at present, to Observe. To Chronicle. To Wait.

And Learn in process.

So it's my hope you'll forgive me when I get distracted. After all, I assume you come here for some reason. Maybe it's because I've become a welcome distraction for you.

John François Kerry is outraged over comments made on the Rush Limbaugh Radio Show Friday afternoon. I was listening... I doubt Kerry was. It was probably a Kerry staffer whose job it is to listen in on the enemy du jour. After all, if it's a dirty job someone other than Kerry's gonna hafta do it. Someone pass the Brie...

"His latest statement about Israel is beyond offensive to all of us who have fought to protect Israel in the face of enemies committed to its destruction."

What did Limbaugh say that got Kerry so bent out of shape?

Limbaugh said the most frequent guest in the Clinton White House, besides Monica Lewinsky and the campaign donors in the Lincoln bedroom, was Yasser Arafat. He called President Bush the best friend Israel ever had in the White House.

"Rush Limbaugh needs to pick up a history book instead of a doughnut," Kerry added. "It was a Democratic president who first recognized the State of Israel. It was a Democratic president who first sold Israel defensive weapons. And it was a Democratic president who first sold Israel offensive weapons."

1. Is Kerry implying he himself has "fought to protect Israel in the face of enemies committed to its destruction"? Uh.... What were the Viet Cong doing in the Middle East? And was Kerry AWOL at the time? Where's Dan Rather when you need him?

2. Doughnut? Are you kidding me? Is that your best shot?

3. A Democratic President was the first to recognize Israel because a Democratic President was in office when Israel became a nation.

4. The same undoubtedly goes for the selling of Defensive and Offensive weapons as well.

Your outrage, Monsieur, is as much a façade as your integrity.

----

I commented on this Thursday, but WorldNetDaily has seen fit to publish another news piece on the now cancelled World Pride Jerusalem event that was scheduled for August the 6th--12th.

Said Pinchas Winston, a noted author, rabbi and lecturer based in Jerusalem...

"Why does this war break out this week, all of sudden with little warning? Because this is the exact week the Jewish people are trying to decide whether the gay pride parade should take place in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv."

Winston called the parade "an attack against God himself."

"God has told the Jewish people, 'If you are not going to fight for my honor, you will be forced to fight for your own honor.'"

File this one under: Interestingly Enough. I've mentioned this one in passing as well a day or so ago...

[The] leading Wahhabi cleric in Saudi Arabia issues scathing fatwa against Hizbullah... Sheik Abdullah bin Jabreen declares it against Muslim Sharia law to support, join, or even pray for the terror group, writing, "our advice to the Sunnis is to denounce them and shun those who join them to show their hostility to Islam and to the Muslims," the report said.

The New York Sun reports that the fatwa also condemns Iran for funding and supporting Hezbollah to further what Jabreen called its imperial ambitions.

This fatwa joins a ruling by a Kuwaiti sheikh, who harshly condemned the imperialistic aspirations of Iran through Hizbullah following the abduction of Israeli soldiers on the Lebanon border.

The surprising move by the Sudi sheikh demonstrates the controversy among cleric in the Middle East regarding the issue of supporting or opposing Hizbullah, which is a Shiite organization.

Some Sunni clerics, such as the Muslim Brotherhood members in Egypt, have declared their support of Hizbullah.

The Wahhabi faction, however, usually opposed Hizbullah's armed struggle against Israel. The faction members are well familiar with the controversy between the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq.

Now what did I tell you all in previous posts... This war is really between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the Sunni's against the Shiite's. Israel is burdensome stone to Iran, and convenient impetus for Saudi Arabia. We could even say that the conflict in Iraq; the sectarian violence many in the media are erroneously calling a civil war, is merely a microcosm of the ideological war in the broader Middle East.

----

This last piece comes from Agence France Presse... It seems Miss Lebanon and Miss Israel, contestants at the Miss Universe Pageant, are fast friends.

"I think the perpetrators of the current Middle East crisis could learn a few lessons from Miss Lebanon and Miss Israel, who are the best of friends here..."

--Miss Germany Natalia Ackerman.

I guess there's more to Miss Universe than the bathing suit competition... Speaking of which, Brooke at NeoCon Command Center has a humorous picture of the newest trend in female muslim bathing suits. There's some witty commentary as well.

Just about everyone on the tube, and on the internet seems infatuated with the idea of Proportional Response. Israel should use restraint, and only retaliate proportionally, ie; kill eight Lebanese, kidnap two and fire approximately 1200 rockets at civilian targets... With the intent to kill CIVILIANS.

The United Nations seeks a cease fire, as does much of the world, but they all fail to see that the only thing cease fires accomplish is to allow enough breathing space for both sides to regroup and restock. No conflict is ever resolved by a cease fire.

At The American Enterprise Online, Daren Bakst, in his piece, 'The Fallacy of Proportionality' explains why Israel has no choice but to reject the World's insane new standard. Israel has far too much to lose by reacting other than she already has, and the World gives a glimpse as to why it treats Israel with a 'Disproportional' standard....

Israel isn't reacting, nor should it, based on a one-to-one response to Hezbollah's actions. Instead, it is identifying the means by which future-- not past --attacks will cease. It is hard to imagine any other country being so roundly criticized for such reasonable self-defense.

If "disproportional force" were used in its proper context, there wouldn't be any criticism of Israel. Certainly, a country can fairly be criticized for acting disproportional to a provocation if it is going beyond what is necessary to defend itself. For Israel, it must meet a much tougher standard-- a standard that has nothing to do with self-defense.

"A standard that has nothing to do with self-defense." What then does this new bizarre standard have to do with? The world seeks to hold Israel to a standard it would surely consider anathema were it applied to itself. Perhaps the reasoning behind this stems from the sure knowledge that Israel is a creation of the U.N. Before permission was given for Israel to declare herself a nation, Israel had no borders to speak of... Anywhere.

The worlds deplorable attitude toward Israel may be further explained by the obvious guilt Europe and the U.S. felt at the time over their own efforts to prevent the Jews from emigrating to Palestine before and during World War II. But the world today can only see that were it not for their benevolence, Israel would not exist, and Israel therefore must obey the dictates of its less than loving parents. The current attitude toward Israel and "all those Jews..." is colored by the worlds feelings of affront; that Israel won't mind the nations that graciously allowed her to become a nation.

One question remains: how old must a child be before its parents grudgingly recognize its maturity, and subsequent ability to fend for itself. Israel is doing the only mature thing it can in this, and that is to insure its survival and that of its people.

But that doesn't satisfy all the peaceniks, or the peaceniks in enlightened clothing. There are far too many people in the world with unrealistic visions of what it takes to make peace, and it's not entirely their fault, says Thomas Sowell...

One of the many failings of our educational system is that it sends out into the world people who cannot tell rhetoric from reality. They have learned no systematic way to analyze ideas, derive their implications and test those implications against hard facts.

The world, in short-- especially America --suffers from a deficiency of honest intellectualism; to say nothing of intellectual honesty. Peace movements, says Sowell, do not actually produce peace.

Take the Middle East. People are calling for a cease-fire in the interests of peace. But there have been more cease-fires in the Middle East than anywhere else. If cease-fires actually promoted peace, the Middle East would be the most peaceful region on the face of the earth instead of the most violent.

Was World War II ended by cease-fires or by annihilating much of Germany and Japan? Make no mistake about it, innocent civilians died in the process. Indeed, American prisoners of war died when we bombed Germany.

There is a reason why General Sherman said "war is hell" more than a century ago. But he helped end the Civil War with his devastating march through Georgia -- not by cease fires or bowing to "world opinion" and there were no corrupt busybodies like the United Nations to demand replacing military force with diplomacy.

Just as much of the world has forgotten its collective guilt over the murder of 6 million Jews, so too has the world forgotten why Germany and Japan were defeated-- why ANY enemy is defeated... Overwhelming force and firepower. It has never been because of any peace movement, or proportional response to aggressive and violent neighbors. For an example of just what a peace movement WILL achieve we need only look at Vietnam, and the last helicopter pulling away from the U.S. Embassy in Saigon... And the masses of refugees begging for a ride. One need only look at the millions killed by the Communist Regime that took over South Vietnam, or the resultant extermination of millions in Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge when they saw America would not be a deterrent.

The current climate in America-- the belief that America cannot win, is a direct result of Peaceniks and Pacifists, who, though well-meaning, believe beyond question the immortal words of Lennon... "All you need is love". And yet these are the same people who also religiously claim Lennon's "Imagine" as their Party Anthem...

"Imagine there's no heaven,It's easy if you tryNo hell below usAbove us only sky..."

But all these worshippers fail, just as Sowell postulates, to discern rhetoric from reality. They chant 'Imagine there's no heaven' without seeing the implications inherent in the song... To imagine something isn't there, implies the recognition that 'it is indeed there, and wouldn't it be nice if it wasn't?'

Israel wants peace. But her neighbors won't allow it. And all the marches, all across the world, and all the grand speeches will not sway the hearts of Palestinians or Syrians or Iranians, to let them live in peace.

Perhaps the biggest flaw in the American educational system is its departure from historical truth. Very few on the web and on TV have an accurate grasp of how Israel came to be, and just who the poor Palestinian people truly are.

But while America and the world bemoan the evil Israelis for their disproportional response to 8 murders, 2 kidnappings, and a thousand plus rockets aimed at innocent civilians, Iran is conveniently forgotten-- when the cat's away, the mice will place, or so it's said. Yes, Iran, the very same nation who has been ordered to cease their refinement of uranium. There's a lot of speculation about who's responsible for the current hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, and why now?

It was expected of Iran to present its official response to the U.N.'s Nuclear Proposal, but with hostilities now in Palestine, Iran is deciding to wait awhile... By August 24th they now say. What is Iran really up to?

Some claim that Israel, as a non-signatory of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, has every right to "The Bomb". Others point out that Iran is playing the long game... Cheap and cheerful measures such as giving Hezbollah and Hamas a few rocket launchers via Syria to keep the spotlight off her nuclear weapons program. The wars, they say, are phony-- the real war is the one Iran will direct when she has nuclear capability, especially in light of Ahmadinejad's recent Hitleresque rhetoric. Still others are ignorant and wonder why Israel is allowed to break the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and Iran is not.

There's even those who think Hezbollah's offensive is nothing more than the testing of missile delivery systems for later fitting with tactical nuclear weapons now under development in Iran.

One comment I found is very telling... Keeping in mind, of course, that these comments are coming from average folks like you and me, which only goes to highlight the complete and utter lack of useful commentary from the media elite....

"The Iranians are stalling so determinedly that weeks and months seem to be of critical importance to them. I wonder therefore if they are on a timescale of 12-18 months rather than the 5 years suggested by Hans Blix..."

And echoing a comment I made... Somewhere... A few days ago,

"The real war is between Iran and Saudi Arabia across the whole region, to see who has hegemony. It is Sunni vs Shia in Iraq, as it is in Lebanon where Iran seeks to impose a Shia solution. For the first time, Israel is not the key issue but represents for the Saudis a bulwark of their system, and for the Iranians an impediment to their power and influence."

In other words... It's all about politics. The world is a great big "Risk" board, where armies are the game pieces; where continents, and ultimately world domination, the big prize.

Perhaps the biggest surprise to me is Ahmadinejad's letter to Germany, all but asking Germany's help in the Palestinian Solution, which, if one looks at it from the Islamofascist perspective, is the destruction of Israel. Imagine that! Iran asking Germany for help with the 'Final Solution'! A solution, I might add, that Ahmadinejad refuses to believe even occurred! "Amazing gall, how sick the stench..."

But none of this really matters in the long run. Iran will never destroy Israel. Hezbollah will never defeat Israel. Not Hamas, Syria, or all the hosts of every nation on earth will ever defeat Israel. God fights for them.

That's not to say Israel won't suffer. God never promises we won't suffer. But through suffering-- through fire --individuals and nations are purged of impurities; refined like silver and gold. Everything that would tarnish their luster are burned away, and the metal poured out and made ready for the smith and jeweler.

Time is growing short. The moment will come as abruptly as my closing. And it's time now to choose sides.

TEL AVIV – As rockets slam into Israel and Israeli reprisals force Lebanese to flee the border region and parts of Beirut, more than 3,000 American citizens are leaving the comfort and security of the United States to make war-torn Israel their home.

"What is the best answer to Hezbollah?" asked former Israeli prime minister and current opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu during a welcome address to the new citizens. "You are the answer to Hezbollah."

...

At a farewell ceremony for the emigrating American citizens in New York's John F. Kennedy international airport, Israel's consul general in New York, stated, "The fact that you are making Aliyah at this point in time is a vote of confidence and security in the state of Israel and the victory over terrorism."

...

Sammy Capuano, who arrived on the flight with his wife Shiri and their six-month-old son from Aventura, Fla., told WND that despite the ongoing violence, "it's a feeling of relief to be in Israel."

"God could have put Israel in Texas or the Bahamas," Capuano said. "But God put us here amongst our enemies to teach us that our security comes from one source: from following God's commandments.

I don't know which is more disturbing, the camp that believes 600 million people all jumping at the same precise moment can save the world from global warming? Or the 'Anti-Jumpers' who seek to thwart the evil plan of the 'Jumpers', who if successful, may make obsolete the Gregorian calendar?

Extending this line of logic a little further... If aliens were to rapture every living creature on the face of the planet, all at the same precise moment, the earth could very well go spinning off into space. It could happen. But then, the stars could also be nothing more than pin-holes in the curtain of night.

But you'll all be relieved to know the whole thing is a hoax. A flash mob almost 600 million strong... Which, now that I think about it, makes me wonder what is more disturbing, the camp that believes 600 million people all jumping at the same precise moment can alter world climate? Or the fact that 600 million people have actually registered to do just that?

Yes, it's true. All things work to His glory... God's glory! And this war is a blessing in disguise. Not only will Israel teach the terrorists that she is not at all toothless, but thanks to Hezbollah-- and Hamas for giving them the idea --there will likely be no, I repeat, NO Gay Pride parade in Jerusalem next month.

I'd rather see the nation of Israel at war with her neighbors than see the holy city of Jerusalem so defiled. What think you? Does that sentiment officially label me as 'Evil'? 'Mis-guided'? 'Homophobic'? Or all of the above?

Whatever your thoughts... consider at least the fortuitiveness of this present conflict occuring now, just two weeks before WorldPride Jerusalem was scheduled to begin.

Who says God is not in control? And who's to say this isn't the result of Iran simply wishing to divert attention away from their nuclear ambitions? Which begs the reiteration of my previous question...

Who says God is not in control?

From the article:

Religious leaders from the Jewish, Muslim and Christian communities within Israel have been working together to prevent the event from taking place in the holy city—earlier in the month Jerusalem police officials finally conceded that the event would "likely" be moved to Tel Aviv. The decision was not finalized, but the police said in a statement to the press, "Tel Aviv is more used to such events, and therefore it should take place there also this time."

Imagine that, Jews, Muslims, and Christians can actually agree on something... There's hope for us all yet.

It would now seem the "Event" will likely not occur anywhere in Israel... this year.

In February 2004, U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, sent a fund-raising letter with the "alarming news" that "right-wing politicians" had passed a law stopping doctors from stabbing half-born babies in the neck with scissors, suctioning out their brains and crushing their skulls.

Michelle called partial-birth abortion "a legitimate medical procedure," and wouldn't supporters please pay $150 to attend a luncheon for her husband, who would fight against "cynical ploy[s]" to stop it?

As a nurse at an Illinois hospital in 1999, I discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms. I discovered infanticide.

Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.

BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother's right to "choose" stopped at her baby's delivery.

The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the House. NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002.

But in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.

I testified in 2001 and 2002 before a committee of which Obama was a member.

Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. Obama's clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed.

In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics.

(As chair of that same committee, Obama once abruptly ended a hearing early, right before Scott and Janet Willis, the parents of six children killed as a result of Illinois' drivers licenses for bribes scandal, were to testify in favor of Choose Life license plate legislation. I was there for that one, too. The Willises had traveled three hours. Reporters filled the room. Obama stalled. He later killed the bill when no one was around.)

So, the reason Keyes said Jesus Christ wouldn't vote for Barack Obama was because of Obama's fanatical support of abortion to the point of condoning infanticide.

I have framed on my wall a Chicago Sun-Times cartoon published during the campaign. Obama is holding a sign with "LIVE BIRTH ABORTION" on it. God is reaching down from heaven to a baby in front of Obama, and the baby is reaching up to God. Obama is yelling at God, "You keep out of this!"

In his USA Today opinion piece, Obama admitted being "nagged" by the Jesus-wouldn't-vote-for-him statement, but only because he wished he'd given a different comeback.

Obama insinuated opposition to abortion is based only on religion, lecturing pro-lifers like me to "explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."

I don't recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash.

Neither do I recall religion being brought into the partial-birth abortion ban debate. I recall comparisons made to U.S. laws ensuring animals being killed are treated humanely. I recall testimony that late-term babies feel excruciating pain while being aborted.

Obama stated pro-life proposals must be "amenable to reason."

OK, Sen. Obama, let's reason. Explain why you support abortion for whatever rationale, at whatever gestation, by whatever means. Explain why you support infanticide, if banning it might interfere with abortion.

Then, since you brought it up, explain how, despite all that, you think Jesus should vote for you, either now or in the hereafter, particularly given His statement, "It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around the neck than to face the punishment in store for harming one of these little ones."

----Jill Stanek fought to stop "live-birth abortion" after witnessing one as a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. In 2002, President Bush asked Jill to attend his signing of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. In January 2003, World Magazine named Jill one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders of the past 30 years. To learn more, visit Jill's blog, Pro-life Pulse.

----...and no, I did not acquire permission to reprint Ms. Stanek's commentary in full. If Ms. Stanek or WorldNetDaily.com want's me to take it down, I will... But for now, for those of you out there who don't venture to WorldNetDaily, this was posted in full to further illustrate the level to which Evil is presently at work in this nation.

Following up on a comment I left at Daddio's Darkside yesterday-- 15 comments down...

"Oddly enough-- though not that odd at all --Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and several other Islamic countries are NOT actively condemning Israel for their actions against their terrorist-tormentors."

...I was surprised to so quickly find confirmation of what was evident by the lack of vocal Arab dissent on the evening news-- Western as well as Middle Eastern.

Arab world fed up with HizbullahBy Khaled Abu Toameh (Note please the name... definitely NOT Israeli)

With the exception of the Palestinians, the Arab world appears to be united in blaming Iran and Syria for the fighting in Lebanon. Until last week, Arab political analysts and government officials were reluctant to criticize Hizbullah in public. But now that Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and his top aides are in hiding, an anti-Hizbullah coalition is emerging not only in Lebanon, but in several other Arab countries as well.

...

The anti-Hizbullah coalition, which appears to be growing with every Israeli missile that drops on the heads of Hizbullah leaders and headquarters, is spearheaded by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. These three countries, together with many Arab commentators and political analysts, are convinced that the leaders of Teheran and Damascus are using Hizbullah to divert attention from Iran's nuclear program and Syria's involvement in the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

...

Wadi Batti, an Iraqi columnist, said the Arabs should realize that militias and gangsters will only worsen their conditions. "The Lebanese example confirms the fears of Arabs about the presence of armed militias that threaten our stability and security," he wrote.

"By initiating the confrontation with Israel, Hizbullah has made a mockery of the Lebanese government and leaders, who are now seen as pawns in the hands of Nasrallah. How long will the Arabs continue to fight on behalf of Iran?"

Echoing the mood among most of his Lebanese fellow Christians, Joseph Bishara said: "Hizbullah is trying to provoke Israel into war to divert attention from the mistakes made by the Syrian and Iranian regimes. Bashar Assad and Ali Khamenei are using Hizbullah to achieve their direct and indirect goals in the region. They used Hizbullah to ease the pressure exerted by the international community on Syria and Iran.

"How can we ask Israel to have mercy on the Lebanese while Hizbullah is betraying Lebanon day and night?"

Hezbollah and Hamas may have no other choice but to surrender their captives, and cease hostilities. It not clear whether they will consider this a viable option, for just as they viewed as weakness Israels pulling out of southern Lebanon six years ago, and Gaza last year, they may decide pulling out of this present conflict will do them no favors in the future. They may well see such a capitulation as a betrayal of their base... though they've done as much by continuing their attacks on Israel, who has shown more restraint than the U.S. has ever shown.

What the world fails to understand in all this is that God loves Israel and has, and will continue, to defend her. Perhaps this is why the rest of the world hates Israel so very much... because they hate God.

I haven't been able to find the complete text of the Prime Minister's speech, but here are all the quoted portions I could find.

"I want to offer a big hug to the families of the kidnapped and to the sons themselves."

"We stand at a national moment of truth. Will we agree to live under this evil threat or will we fight…There is no more just struggle than that we are now engaged in,"

"Our enemies were mistaken to think that our desire to show restraint was a sign of weakness,"

"It is of regional and international interest to control and dismantle the terror organizations and remove this threat from the Middle East. We intend to do so."

Hizbullah and Hamas... "are nothing but emissaries, sent and supplied by enemies of peace in Tehran and Damascus."

"[Lebanon] holds full responsibility for the attack launched from its sovereign territory and the same goes for the PA with regard to the Kerem Shalom attack... Opposite the Palestinians we will fight until terrorism ceases, Gilad Shalit is brought home and the Kassam rockets stop,"

"Our position in the north was backed up by the G8 yesterday. We demand a complete end to hostilities, the return of the two kidnapped soldiers and the compliance with the relevant UN resolutions... We withdrew to recognized borders according to the entire international community."

"I am more proud today than any other day in my life to be a citizen of the State of Israel," Olmert concluded. "We will not surrender and we will not back down."

Amen. May God grant peace to Jerusalem, to all of Israel, and His chosen people.

"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."

"Listen up, I've got less than thirty seconds here. You know Joe Wilson? He got the gig to Niger because of his wife, and guess what? She's really a secret agent for the CIA-- one 'Valerie Plame'.... Now, I have to insist on anonymity. You do NOT have permission to use my name in any article you write. I'm just a ghost giving you the heads up on what's really going on here...."

That's what could've been said in 20 seconds if Rove spoke really fast, without interruption. But Novak remembers the conversation differently...

Said Novak to Rove: "I understand that [Wilson's] wife works at the CIA and she initiated the mission."

Rove: "Oh, you know that, too."

Novak still refuses to reveal the identity of his primary source-- suffice to say, it was not Karl Rove.

So there you have it... That's what COULD'VE been said in 20 seconds. Yet wasn't.

...But only a blind idiot could fail to see the level to which the escalating conflict between Israel and her peaceful neighbors will soon reach.

Ehud Olbert too seems incapable of perceiving the blatantly obvious. His continued insistence that Israel, by pulling out of much of the West Bank territories of Judea and Samaria, will somehow engender feelings of brotherly love in the breasts of their enemies is-- for lack of [a] better word(s) --Suicidally Idiotic.

No, I am not a prophet, but I can say with as much certainty that Israel's enemies seem to honestly believe that she, despite their continued assortment of rocket attacks, suicide bombings and kidnappings, will not seek to utterly destroy them with a ferocity that is obviously beyond the capacity of Palestinians to fathom. These idiots have obviously never witnessed the lengths to which a cornered animal will go to defend its own life and limb...

And I assure you, Israel is far more dangerous than any ten-thousand cornered animals. But again, I am no prophet. So take everything I've just written with any number of grains of salt.

"The American flag stands for the fact that cloth can be very important. It is against the law to let the flag touch the ground or to leave the flag flying when the weather is bad. The flag has to be treated with respect. You can tell just how important this cloth is because when you compare it to people, it gets much better treatment. Nobody cares if a homeless person touches the ground. A homeless person can lie all over the ground all night long without anyone picking him up, folding him neatly and sheltering him from the rain.

"School children have to pledge loyalty to this piece of cloth every morning. No one has to pledge loyalty to justice and equality and human decency. No one has to promise that people will get a fair wage, or enough food to eat, or affordable medicine, or clean water, or air free of harmful chemicals. But we all have to promise to love a rectangle of red, white, and blue cloth.

"Betsy Ross would be quite surprised to see how successful her creation has become. But Thomas Jefferson would be disappointed to see how little of the flag's real meaning remains."

I take issue with but one point: By pledging Loyalty to the flag, one is also pledging loyalty "...to the Republic for which it stands; one nation, under God, with Liberty and Justice for all." Human decency is implied in that pledge. The rest-- a fair wage, enough food, affordable medicine, clean water, and clean air are all political constructs, the underlying themes and implications of which are typically beyond the grasp of a twelve year old. but if Mozart, at the tender age of only eight composed his first symphony, why can't a 12 year old be so thoroughly and "liberally" indoctrinated, and talented enough to write a 'New York Times-quality' piece on injustice and the worthlessness of the American Flag?

I suspect Charlotte Aldebron had help. The concepts and imagery in this short but sweet essay are beyond the ability of even the most precocious of American 6th Graders. The quality of education in this country just cannot account for this kind of quality from a 12-year old.

So. It wasn't the hated Karl Rove 'with a KKK'. It was Joe Wilson's entry in Who's Who in America... his vanity... that provided a name for columnist Robert Novak for his July 14, 2003 article wherein the terms Valerie Plame and CIA Agent were fatefully connected.

Robert Novak falls short of naming his 'primary' source, but does list Rove and Bill Harlow as corroborating sources. Who is the primary source? Mr. Novak isn't yet saying, accept to say the name came up during a long conversation with "an official who [I] have previously said was not a political gunslinger." [emphasis mine]

Two statements thus far seem to contradict each other. Was it Mr. Wilson's entry in Who's Who in America wherein Novak first learned the name of Valerie Plame? Or was it in conversation with a non political-gunslinger?

What would prompt Novak to crack open Who's Who in America, unless it was to ferret out the particulars of a specific name's education, degrees, accomplishments, etc.? Did he first learn the name Valerie Plame from a casual perusal of Who's Who in America, or from the as of yet unnamed 'Primary' source... which is not Karl Rove.

According to Novak's long awaited disclosure, it is his belief that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's complete lack of indictments of the three men in question indicates Fitzgerald does not believe any of the three violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. And the only person indicted thus far in this whole affair is I 'Scooter' Libby, who will likely not even be convicted of the charges against him, namely, Perjury.

That won't keep the Leftist Media Propaganda Machine from spinning Novak's article to imply it says pretty much what they've believed all along, that Rove is a bad guy, and should step down before Bush can keep his promise to fire anyone in his administration found to have broken the law. Nevermind the fact that no law has obviously been broken-- that little fact won't matter to the Propaganda Machine.

No one will suggest Joe Wilson brought all this upon himself and his wife, to say nothing of Novak or his primary, and secondary sources. Nor is it likely we will be reminded that it was the very same Joe Wilson who said he wanted to see Rove "Frog Marched" out of the White House in handcuffs, for outing his undercover 'secret agent girl' of a wife.

You can certainly expect to hear nothing that remotely resembles an apology. What you will hear and read about is a lot of angry liberal-extremists trying to keep the bonfires hot with rhetoric and fresh conspiracy theories.

These are the same people who call those of us on the right 'Extreme' and 'Radical'.

Reagan was accused of using Cowboy Diplomacy... mostly because he enjoyed riding horses and the marriage of horses and politics was too tempting a 'marriage' of meanings for the press to pass up.

Bush, similarly, is branded as a diplomatic cowboy. Not because he likes to ride horses, because I can't honest remember ever seeing him on a horse-- unlike Reagan, but because he's from Texas, the quintessential Cowboy State. So let's consider the doctrine of Cowboy Diplomacy, as described by the press, in light of this president's REAL record...

N. Korea -- "Hold on now, fellas. I know they shot some missles in are gen-rul die-reckshun, but we allowed 'em to have them thar missles. And remember also were stretched kinda thin elsewar's. Let's see what a sit down will a'complish. If'n that don't werk we kin squeeze thair pocketbooks real good. What ah'm tryin' t'say is, let's see if'n they kin even git a rocket off'n the pad furst, he, he, he!"

Cowboy Diplomacy? Only in the mind of the Media.

Preemption: "The right of a government to seize or appropriate something (as property)" or "Carpe Diem" or "To do unto others before they do unto you"

So why would the White House feel it necessary to redefine "preemption"? Because the press can't even get "Cowboy Diplomacy" right.

"I think there's a misconception that preemption means war. It doesn't. Preemption means stopping somebody before they can do you harm. There are diplomatic ways to do that,"

Who the heck is Abu Mu'sab al Zarqawi? Wasn't he one of those terrorists over in Iraq? How many did he kill? Whoever or whatever he was he's not a shake on 'ol Kim. For Zarqawi, winter has come with no hope of spring. For Kim Jong Il however, the fruits of summer are all but ready for harvest.

The seeds planted in 1994 by U.S. officials in the form of a non-binding agreement to provide light water reactors to North Korea in exchange for the dropping of their graphite-moderated nuclear reactors have at last reaped a bitter fruit. In only 12 years Kim Jong Il's communistic dynasty has managed to become a genuine threat to the world's only remaining super power-- "only remaining" because, of the old order, the U.S. is all that remains, but that's not to say a new order cannot or will not arise. It is assured that such a new order will arise. It's only a matter of time. Just as it was only a matter of time before the communist regime of North Korea developed nuclear weapons despite it's impotent agreement with the United States.

While the U.S. was busy signing impotent agreements, her politicians were busy adopting impotent policies for the dealing with oath-breakers and psychopaths. The problem is not with the likes of Kim Jong Il, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but rather, in the Western belief that reason can win out over fanaticism. It is the West's impotent policy of negotiation and multi-lateral talks that will allow Kim Jong Il his day in the sun... However brief that may ultimately be.

Summer is also a season for Rabies, and fear and hatred of the West is every bit as dangerous. It's easy to look at Iran, Palestine, and North Korea, and recognize that their policy of indocrination through education is an evil unparalleled in the rest of the world. Those who believe this fail to grasp the nature of American education, and the rabid tenacity of those who defend the destructive ideology American education espouses.

The Summer of 2006 may well turn out to be the summer of dangerous ideologues with Kim Jong Il its chiefest prince, but we only have ourselves to blame... for believing that irrational men can be rationalized with, and for believing preemption a worse evil than the wild gesticulations of insane and dangerous men.

I've been toying with a statement that's been running through my head for the better part of two years. I know it's an original statement only because I've googled the first half of it numerous times and have never gotten a hit. I have a specific purpose for this statement, one I'm not willing to divulge at this point except to say I intend to use it as an introduction to something much, much larger.....

"Muhammad shook the world, Islam made it bitter"

When googling the second half of this statement the only hit you'll get is a post at this very blog, one year ago; but with Allah injected as shaker. I find it interesting that, either way, the statement is nonetheless true. But judging from my own notes on the project in question, "Muhammad" is the original thought; and this project has been brewing since early 2001-- pre 9/11, albeit without the 'Islam' element.

I will undoubtedly wrestle with my choice of the two until I actually begin writing. There's still some research to do, as well as ferreting out any blatant inconsistencies; fiction after all requires the reader to suspend at least a modicum of disbelief, and in this respect, I'm not out to reinvent the wheel.

But how's this for a question/premise?

"How does one blend the colorful dialects of Appalachian hillbillies with Islam as a conquering force?"

NOTE: to anyone interested...

Every story that's truly good relies on conversation; the verbal and physical interaction between characters. Without communication there's no story. Except in cases where the story was completed in one or two sittings, I've always approached storytelling in terms of conversations. By this, I mean I tend to always write conversations first. This is how I know where the characters are going, what they're thinking, and why they would say or do this, and not that.

Mina and Tel are two such Appalachian hillbillies with thick dialects. Tel is short for Telemachus, and Mina is short for Willamina. Here's a sample of dialog...

Mina: They’ll kill ye

Tel: Mayhap they will, but I ain't got no choice. Now, you can run if ye want, but if Elias is as good as you say it won't make no dif'rince, and it'd prolly go easier on ya if ye stay. But if ye run an' I don't git kilt, I cain't very well take them chains off ye. I cain't go huntin' ye... I got t' git my pa down the mountain. But do as ye like. I gotta go.

M: Wait! Ye got t'git Marty first. He's a crack with that cross bow 'a his. But it's a crank; once he's fired, it's got t'be cranked back to fire again, and 'e cain't do it 'a layin' down. He's got t'stand, 'n by the looks of things, they ain't much t'hide behind. How good a shot're ye?

T: Fair

M: Good Lord! Fair? How far was ye when ye shot at Jacks?

T: Eighty paces'r so

M: What were ye aimin' at?

T: His chest.

M: I reckon thet's good enough.

[she's being sarcastic here, Tel killed Jacks with a single shot to the chest, ala Burt Reynolds from "Deliverance"]

"The Democrats have many mantras and slogans: 'grim milestone,' 'hopeless quagmire,' 'culture of corruption' and 'Karl Rove's dingo ate my baby.' But for a while they've had one big overall slogan, dripping with gusto: 'Together, America Can Do Better.' Not will, or should, or must, but 'can.' It's like saying, 'Together, Frenchmen can win a hot-dog speed eating contest.' Doesn't mean it's going to happen, or that you'd want to watch. But it's typical of modern politics—vague and patriotic, but not so patriotic it would unnerve a Dixie Chick. Together, America Should Be Greater! Together, America Might Go Further! Together, Democrats Can Win Elections! Providing the Republicans stay home."

I find I am often tempted to stop running-- like now; just quit the race. My soul wants to quit. My spirit asks, "what else is there?" My soul tells me I can never finish, let alone win. My spirit says, "everyone who finishes wins." My soul cries out that there is too much baggage to continue, and my soul is right... I have no idea what my spirit is saying right now.

No, this isn't an ad for Blogger; just let me get that out of the way, but I have discovered over the last few months, at the cost of lots of experimentation hours, that if one is willing to do without 'certain' features common to normal webpages, you can pretty much have all you need here, provided you're willing to do all the work yourself... like designing the look and workability of your very own Poor Man's webpage. Aside from that, here's some other things Joe Poorman can't do in blogger... yet. [hint hint]

2. Joe can't post music or video files either, and neither can he post flash games for the amusment of his loyal readers

3. Joe has a limited number of storage space for images, so he has to be frugal

4. And then there's the outages. Blogger is notorious for dropping service unexpectedly... usually while Joe is trying to post his magnificently beautiful 3500 word thesis on the meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything. Thank you Mr. Adams

Since when did this blog become anyone's forum to demand or command me? This is my house. If I ask my guests to remove their shoes at the door, should I not expect my guests to comply? If I ask my guests to not smoke in the house, should I not expect them to respect me enough to go outside? If I've made it clear through my actions, my words, and my profession of faith that the use of drugs at this party is simply not allowed, should I not call the police the moment I find two guests in the bathroom shooting up? It's a question of respect. One either respects the host, or one refuses the invitation.

That 'refusal of invitation' is extended to debate in this, MY forum. I admit I've neglected my duties in this regard-- from the beginning; wanting to give everyone a say, not even caring when the comments got off topic. No more. Up to now, the debate has been less than healthy.

So. What would properly define 'Healthy Debate'? The lack of opposing viewpoints? Obviously not; what kind of debate could one have without a voice from the other side? I contend the health of a debate lies in the truthfulness of its arguments. The moment one or both sides begin to offer rhetoric desirous only of an atmosphere of contentiousness and dishonesty, it is a debate no more, but rather, the tool of perverse wit to the fomenting of strife and disruption-- In effect, to hinder whatever progress was previously being made, and if possible, to destroy any hope of it outright.

Here's an example of what I mean: The argument, "I support the troops, but not the war" is the equivalent of a paradox... an oxymoron... an outright lie painted up pretty to hide the cancer suffused throughout. The same is true of, "I'm remembering Independence Day by celebrating the failure of the flag-burning amendment. long live freedom!"

How does propping up hateful rhetoric support the troops who are deeply and adversely affected by the same hateful rhetoric. How does calling the Commander a liar and a chimp, support the troops who will have to face the enemy with the knowledge that his leaders back home are actively trying to pull down their Commander? The statement, "I support the troops, but not the war" is the equivalent of "I voted for the 20 Gazillion dollars before I voted against it." It's called, politely, 'having your cake and eating it too.' It's called 'putting lipstick on a pig.' But it's really an outright lie by means of subterfuge.

How does claiming to be disgusted by the act of burning a symbol of ones freedom jibe with 'celebrating one's right' to burn that self-same symbol? It's a game of dress-up, pretending to be one thing when it's quite another altogether. The person who believes this is not in possession of a healthy intellect. The intellect such a person DOES possess is brought about by the reasoned and empassioned arguments of seemingly wise men, pure of motive, but secretly, with the intent and purpose of clouding the fabric of honest debate. Quite simply, it is a lie. And anyone who spouts such nonsense forces me to shake my head at their gullible acceptance of the Left's progressive philosophy-- A philosophy that finds good in the abhorrent and the merely distastful, while making a Pariah of Goodness and Truth. And we have American Public Education to thank for this.*

Progressives have been very busy these last 50 years, as evidenced by the complete and utter ignorance of just what the Constitution REALLY says.

Example: The First Amendment...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It's quite elegant in it's simplicity, but cancer isn't content to sit idly by allowing the simple or elegant free reign; cancer must distort and corrupt it-- read into the fabric of its simple beauty what isn't there. As a result, Simple Beauty's DNA over time has degraded to the point that our Founding Fathers would not recognize the body this Nation now inhabits, because the body has seen fit to allow free radicals too much time to work their ills on the whole of this nation. As a result America is dying an ugly cancerous death.

The Left has twisted the Establishment clause. The Left has made gangrenous the Free Exercise clause. And the Left has written into the DNA of the 'freedom of speech, or of the press' clause, things that are Simply. Not. There... Nor implied within the First Amendment's simply beauty.

But all this cannot be laid only at the Left's door. The Right has chosen not to fight for truth. The Right has chosen not to combat the Dishonest and 'Specious' rhetoric of the Left. And the Right did not try to change course when course could more easily have been corrected. Now the best anyone can hope for is that this ship will not altogether sink when the hulls are breached upon the rocks looming all too large before us.

There's your answer... Comment moderation is my Course Correction. Take your shoes off at the door or leave, because I'm no longer interested in trying to change anyone's mind. I'm a bit like Jonah in this; I'll preach the truth till I'm blue in the face, but I simply don't care whether anyone repents or not. God never told Jonah to LIKE preaching to the Ninevites. God simply told him to do it. God expected obedience, and He insisted on it until He got it.

And no, I am NOT God. This is however MY forum. And I dare what I choose.

____________________* According to CBS News, out of 24 'developed' nations, the U.S. ranks 18.